Even with slowing sales, iPhone makes up majority of US smartphones sold

Apple is increasingly benefitting from the exodus from feature phones.

Apple appears to be reaping the benefits as more and more feature phone users trade up to smartphones. The company carved out a huge chunk of AT&T and Verizon smartphone sales for the second quarter of the year, according to financial results released by both companies.

AT&T announced on Tuesday that 62 percent of its total subscribers are using smartphones. The company sold 5.1 million smartphones in the second quarter, representing 77 percent of its postpaid device sales. While iPhone sales are down from the last quarter—a typical slowdown that comes as the prospect for a next-generation model approaches—AT&T sold 3.7 million iPhones, or 73 percent of its smartphones sales in the last three months.

This follows Verizon's announcement that 50 percent of its subscriber base is now using a smartphone, and the company sold 5.9 million total in the second quarter. As with AT&T, iPhone sales declined sequentially, but the 2.7 million iPhones that Verizon sold represent 45 percent of its smartphone sales.

Combined, the iPhone netted 58 percent of smartphone sales from the two largest US carriers, which share two-thirds of the US mobile market. Most of the remaining sales were shared among various Android device makers.

Sprint, which has about one-sixth of the US mobile market, also sells iPhones, though it hasn't announced figures for the second quarter of this year. T-mobile, holding a 10 percent share, still does not offer any Apple devices. Apple did expand iPhone sales late in the quarter by tapping into the pre-paid market, with the iPhone 4S now available from Virgin Mobile and Cricket.

Apple will announce its own quarterly financial results this afternoon, with global iPhone sales expected to top 30 million. Be sure to check Ars for our live coverage of Apple's quarterly call at 4pm CDT.

135 Reader Comments

"Combined, the iPhone netted 58 percent of smartphone sales from the two largest US carriers, which share two-thirds of the US mobile market. Most of the remaining sales were shared among various Android device makers."

Ok, 58% of two thirds is 38.6%. Where's the rest of the "majority"?

Even if Tmobile's entire 10% market share was iPhones, it still wouldn't reach 50%!

Methinks someone is misinterpreting the numbers in front of them, intentionally or unintentionally.

Yeah, Last I checked there's a lot more wireless companies selling phones than just ATT and Verizon, sprint hasn't reported any numbers, t-mobile doesn't even sell the iPhone, not to mention plenty of prepaid MVNO's that don't sell iPhone but sell a number of android phones, how 'bout we stop skewing numbers in Apple's favor and admit the truth, as nice as iPhone may be, price wise, it's out of reach of many consumers. (note that doesn't mean Apple's failing, but it also means Android isn't failing either, both are successful products/platforms in different ways, Apple makes Lamborghini and Android is General Motors)

I don't think that comparison is right. Apple makes a one-size-fits all phone w/ tons of add-ons (apps). Android is a bit of a free-for-all. Keeping going the car analogy: Apple makes Model Ts and Android is every other car on the market.

Edit: spelling.

Given how Apple's HW is generally superior (screen density, resolution, GPU performance, CPU performance), it's probably more accurate to say that Apple makes BMWs and Android is every other car on the market. Not the absolute best at everything, but in most things they are better than the average car as well as costing a bit more.

No, no, no!Apple makes the Mini. Or some other posh, trendy but technically so-so car.Android makes kit cars. You can make of them whatever you want, but they will never be the real thing.Nokia makes MBs, and sells them at a discount.

There are four phones that beat the iPhone 4S; the Galaxy S3, the and the HTC One X/S/V.

In two months that likely won't be true any more.

In what respects? There are several Android phones, in addition to the two you mentioned, that outstrip the iPhone 4S in various specifications. For example, the Galaxy Nexus that I mentioned earlier has twice the RAM, a higher clock speed, more pixels (though a lower pixel density), and a barometer.

I think that Android needs beefier hardware than iOS does. I have tested Andoid-phones that had more RAM and faster CPUs than the then current iPhone, and they felt slower. althought that was 1-2 years ago. So I would say that things like CPU speed, amount of RAM etc. are not all that relevant, what matters is what they enable. If iPhone 4S had 128MB of RAM, but it still worked exactly like it does now, I really wouldn't care at all. Would Adroid-phone X be better if it had 2Ghz quad-core CPU and 4GB of RAM, but it still ran slowly? In hardware-specs, yes, in actual use, no. And the latter is what is important, IMO. Hardware-specs are a means to an end, and not an end in themselves.

It's an adequate device but I don't consider it a "smartphone." It's too Fisher-Price for that.

This sort of arrogance really irks me. I have a PhD in Computer Science and I prefer iOS because I appreciate the design of its technical foundation. I prefer its graphics system, advanced imaging and video APIs, its compositing and view rendering. iOS is incredibly advanced, and every WWDC I get excited because Apple adds a ton of new *developer-facing* features.

I've developed for Android too, and I'm left with a different impression. The graphics libraries just aren't as sophisticated — some of the built in vector and type rendering techniques in iOS amaze me. The fact that it can fluidly edit HD video (and it's *easy* for developers to actually build on these technologies) also amazes me. The design of the Core Animation API, and the ease at which it shifts content around the interface is very far ahead (even massive images, when I was stress testing it).

I've followed Apple's work in compilers (LLVM and Clang), graphics (Core Image, Core Video, Accelerate), UI (Core Animation, Quartz) and typography. They are just ahead at this point. ICS (full hardware compositing) and now Jelly Bean (desynchronised animations) fix a lot of the problems I had with Android. But the developer facing APIs and tools just aren't as sophisticated.

Calling it a Fisher-Price toy, as if you somehow know better than all those iOS users, just reeks of ignorance.

The only way Apple wins, is if you take sales for one single model of phone.

That's not unreasonable. For example, if you only compare the Galaxy Series (S, S2, and S3 as analogs to the 3GS, 4, and 4S), Apple outsold Samsung 3:2.

If you also consider the seasonal variations, there's the possibility that Apple will, this year, outsell Samsung across all models because of the probable 60m to 70m iPhones they will sell in a single quarter this year (which is fairly likely to outsell Samsung if for only a single quarter)

There are four phones that beat the iPhone 4S; the Galaxy S3, the and the HTC One X/S/V.

In two months that likely won't be true any more.

In what respects? There are several Android phones, in addition to the two you mentioned, that outstrip the iPhone 4S in various specifications. For example, the Galaxy Nexus that I mentioned earlier has twice the RAM, a higher clock speed, more pixels (though a lower pixel density), and a barometer.

I think that Android needs beefier hardware than iOS does. I have tested Andoid-phones that had more RAM and faster CPUs than the then current iPhone, and they felt slower. althought that was 1-2 years ago. So I would say that things like CPU speed, amount of RAM etc. are not all that relevant, what matters is what they enable. If iPhone 4S had 128MB of RAM, but it still worked exactly like it does now, I really wouldn't care at all. Would Adroid-phone X be better if it had 2Ghz quad-core CPU and 4GB of RAM, but it still ran slowly? In hardware-specs, yes, in actual use, no. And the latter is what is important, IMO. Hardware-specs are a means to an end, and not an end in themselves.

I agree completely, and I said just that earlier in this thread. My roommate's Galaxy Nexus feels slower to me than my iPhone 4S, despite having higher specs. I think it's mostly because of the glitchy scrolling.

I was just trying to figure out what OrangeCream meant by "beat". By objective measures, like hardware specs and various benchmark tests, his statement is false. But he didn't really specify what he meant.

Is it of superior performance? Granted, at the time it came to market, it definitely was. And it was for a long time. It still imrpesses me how well it performs, in sales and in your hand. But I am sure there have been a plethora of phones that perform on par with it for some time now.

He said there was a plethora; my point was that four phones isn't a plethora.

Agreed. Everything I can do on my PC at home with the exception of things i need a large amount of screen real estate for, I can do on my iPhone. Including a few types of content creation. Obviously some things don't make a damned bit of sense on a screen that small, but there are almost always options and alternatives where applications are concerned. That can also be said of plenty of android phones. Seems like a good definition.

Under this definition, my PS3 is a computer as well...

Not even a little bit. Your PS3 doesn't have a flourishing software market with thousands and thousands of productivity and creative applications. That's not even a remotely intelligent comparison.

No, your answer isn't even a remotely intelligent comment.

You've changed the question from "Everything I can do on my PC at home with the exception of things i need a large amount of screen real estate for, I can do on my iPhone. Including a few types of content creation. there are almost always options and alternatives where applications are concerned." to "Everything I can do on my PC at home with the exception of things i need a large amount of screen real estate for, I can do on my iPhone. Including a few types of content creation. there are almost always options and alternatives where applications are concerned.... *your add on* have many different programs to do a few types of content creation". And there are a almost always "options and alternatives where applications are concerned" on the PS3 as well, just like what was mentioned before

Changing the question after I've asnwered is very sad of you, all in some vain effort to try to make me look wrong.

No you are twisting things. Reread the original comment then sit back and experience your wrongness. Also I think you are mixing up 2 commenters.

Ok then...

"Agreed. Everything I can do on my PC at home with the exception of things i need a large amount of screen real estate for, I can do on my iPhone."

Here I ignored the comment about the smaller screen. Now lets see, all three can surf the internet, download games, watch/stream movies, play music, write emails, message others, documents, send pictures, allow for voice chatting. So far, all three match.

"Including a few types of content creation. Obviously some things don't make a damned bit of sense on a screen that small, but there are almost always options and alternatives where applications are concerned."

Again, all three can do this to different degrees. Again, the same. And there are different options and alternatives that do be done. Still the same as my answer....

"That can also be said of plenty of android phones. Seems like a good definition."

A moot comment.

Hmmmm... I saw nothing about your comment of "Your PS3 doesn't have a flourishing software market with thousands and thousands of productivity and creative applications." In fact, the original poster said nothing of "thousands of apps" in any subject. This is where you tried to make my answer seem wrong. So it does look like, yes, I was right.

I feel the need to clarify some things.. likely to my own detriment...

The PS3 is in fact a bitchin ass computer. A lack of applications does not remove the computerness from the exquisite hardware that is the PS3. It can surf the internet, edit high definition video, play music, play games, stream content from other parts of the network, create multiple user profiles, and allow me to use a keyboard and mouse with its gui. It doesn't let me update my spreadsheets, for example, simply because there doesn't seem to be an application for that at the moment. I guess nobody is writing office applications for IBM's Cell architecture and getting them into the Playstation Store. Can't imagine why nobody would be interested in turning their gaming and movie appliance into a cubicle machine.

However, the PS3 does not fit in your pocket, and does not make phone calls, so it is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion about defining a smartphone as a "computer in your pocket that also makes phone calls."

"GPU performance" From what I've seen and used, Tegra powered Android devices are much better for GPU/graphics then the iPhone (and other non-Tegra Android phones). Games look better with better visuals like water moving and flowing.

You are incorrect. Going by every benchmark I've ever seen (Anandtech usually has the best), Tegra is absolutely anemic compared to the GPUs used in the iPhone 3GS/4/4S.

It's an adequate device but I don't consider it a "smartphone." It's too Fisher-Price for that.

This sort of arrogance really irks me. I have a PhD in Computer Science and I prefer iOS because I appreciate the design of its technical foundation. I prefer its graphics system, advanced imaging and video APIs, its compositing and view rendering. iOS is incredibly advanced, and every WWDC I get excited because Apple adds a ton of new *developer-facing* features.

I've developed for Android too, and I'm left with a different impression. The graphics libraries just aren't as sophisticated — some of the built in vector and type rendering techniques in iOS amaze me. The fact that it can fluidly edit HD video (and it's *easy* for developers to actually build on these technologies) also amazes me. The design of the Core Animation API, and the ease at which it shifts content around the interface is very far ahead (even massive images, when I was stress testing it).

I've followed Apple's work in compilers (LLVM and Clang), graphics (Core Image, Core Video, Accelerate), UI (Core Animation, Quartz) and typography. They are just ahead at this point. ICS (full hardware compositing) and now Jelly Bean (desynchronised animations) fix a lot of the problems I had with Android. But the developer facing APIs and tools just aren't as sophisticated.

Calling it a Fisher-Price toy, as if you somehow know better than all those iOS users, just reeks of ignorance.

This also has to be one of the best posts in this thread.

As a CompSci graduate myself (studying a Masters in Software Engineering currently), I am absolutely fascinated and apprecitive of the technology behind Apple's software. Things like CoreAnimation, Grand Central Dispatch, and LLVM/Clang aren't just a means to enable better user experiences (though they certainly do that), they're cutting-edge computer science being performed by some of the best engineers on the planet.

The 'Fisher-Price toy' comment says more about the person making it than it does about Apple. Namely, that they are quite ignorant when it comes to technology.

The "majority" claim in the title is complete fabrication. Chris, the author of this article, has written another article, two weeks later, that actually has data instead of only fantasy, and shows the correct figure is 31%, not a majority.

The "majority" claim in the title is complete fabrication. Chris, the author of this article, has written another article, two weeks later, that actually has data instead of only fantasy, and shows the correct figure is 31%, not a majority.

Apple appears to be reaping the benefits as more and more feature phone users trade up to smartphones. The company carved out a huge chunk of AT&T and Verizon smartphone sales for the second quarter of the year, according to financial results released by both companies.

It's about the second quarter. The iPhone was the majority of smartphone sales from Verizon and AT&T for that quarter. Your link is about worldwide/US total share.

The "majority" claim in the title is complete fabrication. Chris, the author of this article, has written another article, two weeks later, that actually has data instead of only fantasy, and shows the correct figure is 31%, not a majority.

Apple appears to be reaping the benefits as more and more feature phone users trade up to smartphones. The company carved out a huge chunk of AT&T and Verizon smartphone sales for the second quarter of the year, according to financial results released by both companies.

It's about the second quarter. The iPhone was the majority of smartphone sales from Verizon and AT&T for that quarter. Your link is about worldwide/US total share.

Do you have to make a fool of yourself in every thread you enter?

I'd like to say the same to you.

Perhaps you missed this at the top of the page:I'll say it again: complete fabrication.